
Deadly Border Feud Between Thailand & Cambodia
BANGKOK, Thailand -- A deadly border feud between Thailand's U.S.-trained military and Cambodia's Chinese-assisted troops has resulted in a surprise agreement with Phnom Penh retreating and abandoning a freshly dug trench after one Cambodian soldier was killed and both sides reinforced their armies in the disputed Emerald Triangle jungle.
The face-to-face gunfight at the border also sparked questions about Bangkok's fragile civilian-led coalition government and its ability to control Thailand's politicized military which has, when displeased, unleashed 13 coups since the 1930s.
While villagers hurriedly dug schoolyard bunkers, and thousands of travelers were left stranded due to temporary checkpoint closures, Thailand announced on Sunday (June 8) that Cambodian troops agreed to withdraw to their pre-confrontation positions and make other concessions.
"Cambodia agreed to fill in the trenches, to restore the area to its natural state," the Bangkok Post reported on Monday (June 9).
The Thai Army displayed photos of what it said showed a 2,100-ft.-long (650-meter) trench dug by Cambodian troops in the disputed zone.
Two pictures showed a freshly dug trench on May 18 and May 28. Two other photos displayed the site restored and filled with dirt on Sunday (June 8).
In Cambodia, details about the agreement were sketchy.
"The Ministry of National Defense of Cambodia announced today that military commanders from Cambodia and Thailand have agreed to adjust the positions of their troops along certain areas of the border to reduce tensions and avoid confrontation," the Khmer Times reported on June 9 (Monday).
'I ask the public to trust that the government is working to solve this through peaceful means, which is the only way to avoid violence and maintain good relations with our neighboring country,' Cambodia's influential former prime minister Hun Sen said.
Cambodia blames Thai forces for allegedly shooting dead a Cambodian soldier on May 28 during a brief firefight in the Emerald Triangle where eastern Thailand, northern Cambodia, and southern Laos meet.
The jungle and scrubland includes a no man's zone that is not officially demarcated, attracting human and wildlife traffickers, illegal loggers, smugglers, fugitives, and other criminals.
The disputed zone also boasts the ruins of ancient Hindu temples including Ta Moan Thom, Ta Moan Toch, and Ta Kro Bei.
The latest deadly confrontation began when the two nation's armed forces opened fire at each other at Chong Bok pass on the Thai-Cambodian border.
The Cambodians were allegedly digging a trench along the rugged, porous frontier -- drawn 100 years ago by French colonialists.
According to the Thai army, Cambodia's troops "encroached" and shot first when the Thais approached to talk.
Cambodian troops 'misunderstood the situation and started using weapons, so Thai forces retaliated,' a Thai army spokesman said.
In an official letter to Thailand's embassy in Phnom Penh, Cambodia's Foreign Ministry officially demanded an investigation and trial for Thailand's troops who "without provocation" allegedly killed the Cambodian.
The Cambodian soldier's death created increased public support for authoritarian Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet.
"The reaction of the Cambodian public to this situation has surprised me, in how it has caused a large upswell in patriotic sentiment and pro-government support, even from a lot of people I know to be very skeptical of the government," Craig Etcheson, an author and researcher about Cambodia, said in an interview.
"In that sense, it has been very good for the CPP," Mr. Etcheson said, referring to the long-ruling, monopolistic Cambodian Peoples' Party.
Coincidentally, miles away, China was concluding its two-week-long Golden Dragon military exercises with Cambodia which included 2,000 combined personnel, fearsome galloping "robot combat dogs" with assault rifles mounted on their backs, plus helicopters, vehicle-mounted rockets, mortars, and other weaponry.
The Golden Dragon drills do not "threaten or harm any country," said Cambodia's Defense Ministry spokesman Gen. Chhum Socheat.
China is Cambodia's biggest source for weapons and other military needs, including Chinese tanks, armed vehicles, and air defense training, but there was no indication of any Chinese involvement in the border confrontation.
China's President Xi Jinping boosted Phnom Penh's faith in more aid and investment from Beijing during his April visit to Cambodia.
In May, U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs John Noh met Cambodia's Defense Minister and Secretary of State Lt. Gen. Rath Dararoth to discuss security and military relations.
"Both leaders look forward to a U.S. Navy ship visit, and maritime training, to occur at Ream Naval Base later this year, as well as travel by Secretary Hegseth to visit the U.S. ship while in port at Ream," the U.S. Defense Department said on May 31.
U.S. officials hope a U.S. ship will be able to dock, for the first time, near Sihanoukville in Cambodia's Ream Naval Base which is undergoing massive upgrades by China as part of Beijing's Belt and Road Initiative.
Thailand conducts large-scale military exercises with the Pentagon each year and allows the U.S. Navy docking facilities, including the U.S. 7th Fleet's nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, along its shallow Gulf of Thailand coast, bolstering the U.S. Pacific Fleet in the Indo-Pacific region.
The Thai-Cambodian border clash meanwhile exposed cracks between Thailand's elected, civilian-led government and its cautious relationship with the military.
Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra said she wants a peaceful, behind-the-scenes, negotiated settlement between Bangkok and Phnom Penh, but has not announced its terms.
Thailand's military is perceived as bristling against Cambodia.
"The Thai army would prefer a hawkish response," Paul Chambers, a visiting fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, said in an interview before the border agreement was reached.
"As tensions have risen, alarm has grown. Such alarm could intensify to an extent that it affects Thai civil-military relations.
The mood among the public has risen "from apathetic to increasingly alarmed in both countries," Mr. Chambers said.
Others said the differences between Thailand's government and military were not destabilizing -- yet.
"Currently, the Thai military and the civilian government under Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra appear to be aligned in their approach to the border dispute," Sophal Ear, an associate professor of Southeast Asian and other international relations at Phoenix's Arizona State University, said in an interview.
"Both have expressed a preference for peaceful resolution through existing bilateral mechanisms. However, the military has indicated readiness for a 'high-level operation' if necessary, reflecting a cautious stance amid increased Cambodian military activity near the border," Mr. Sophal Ear said.
Prime Minister Paetongtarn expressed her relationship with the army when she said, "The military understands precisely what is happening on the ground. It is the military's responsibility to evaluate whether the situation has reached a point where confrontation is necessary.
"If not, then engaging prematurely could result in great harm."
Thailand and Cambodia meanwhile cooperate on several vital issues including trade and security which may help temper their feud.
Their relations are so tight, for example, that they are jointly accused of helping each other crush political dissidents, according to New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW).
"The Cambodian and Thai governments have engaged in transnational repression -- government efforts to silence dissent by committing human rights abuses against their own nationals outside their own territory -- through reciprocal arrangements targeting dissidents and opposition figures, colloquially known as a 'swap mart'," HRW said.
"Both governments have facilitated assaults, abductions, enforced disappearances, and the forced return of people to their home countries where their lives or freedom are at risk," the rights group said in April.
Thailand and Phnom Penh deny violating the law when it comes to deporting people back to each other's country, despite pleas that fleeing political activists be spared.
In 1999, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet was a cadet at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.
It is unknown if that will temper or give confidence to his military dealings with Thailand.
Ms. Paetongtarn's father, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, had close fraternal ties with Cambodia's previous prime minister and former Khmer Rouge regiment commander Hun Sen, the father of Prime Minister Hun Manet.
Those generational links were especially valuable after Mr. Thaksin was overthrown in a military coup in 2006, leading to 15 years as a self-exiled fugitive from prison sentences for corruption and other financial crimes.
Those enmeshed personal relationships had recently been blamed by some Thais for weakening Bangkok's negotiating stance in an ongoing dispute with Cambodia over mapping their shared Gulf of Thailand which hosts oil and natural gas extraction platforms.
"Right-wing opponents of the Shinawatras, in particular, are using the issue of Thai-Cambodian border issues to attack the Paetongtarn government," Mr. Chambers said.
"This issue could become increasingly productive for the right wing opposition."
Sophal Ear said: "Opposition groups in Thailand have criticized the Shinawatra-led government for its handling of the border dispute, accusing it of being too conciliatory towards Cambodia.
"This strategy taps into nationalist sentiments, but risks being counterproductive if perceived as undermining efforts for a peaceful resolution. The [Thai] government's emphasis on diplomacy may appeal to moderates who prioritize stability over confrontation.
"In Cambodia, there is a sense of nationalistic fervor, with support for the government's decision to seek ICJ intervention.
"In Thailand, the public is more divided, some express concern over national sovereignty, while others prioritize economic and political stability," Mr. Sophal Ear said.
Thailand and Cambodia will engage in talks at a June 14 meeting of the Joint Boundary Committee, said Thai Defense Minister Phumtham.
'The government has made preparations, both the legal aspects and negotiations through mechanisms, along with military preparations on the frontline if that proves necessary,' said the defense minister who is also a deputy prime minister.
"For those who stir up nationalist sentiments, they should understand that war is best avoided," Mr. Phumtham said.
"Don't stir it, or problems will follow."
Richard S. Ehrlich is a Bangkok-based American foreign correspondent reporting from Asia since 1978, and winner of Columbia University's Foreign Correspondents' Award. Excerpts from his two new nonfiction books, "Rituals. Killers. Wars. & Sex. -- Tibet, India, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka & New York" and "Apocalyptic Tribes, Smugglers & Freaks" are available at
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Kiwiblog
an hour ago
- Kiwiblog
Guest Post: Silenced for exposing foreign interference in NZ? Surely not.
A guest post by Nice Hanne of the Free Speech Union: I saw this for myself last Friday in the Manukau District Court when I went to support Portia Mao on behalf of the Free Speech Union. Don't let Portia's appearance or gentle demeanour fool you. This pint-sized Kiwi-Chinese journalist isn't backing down to anyone or anything. Portia is a fierce defender of free speech. Coming to NZ over twenty years ago in search of a democratic society to call home, Portia has earned a reputation amongst the NZ Chinese community for her uncompromising stand against foreign interference by the Communist Party of China (CCP). Exposing the increasingly brazen intimidation tactics and influence peddling in NZ politics by emboldened supporters of the CCP, some dissidents have already paid a heavy price for calling out this anti-democratic agenda. Last year it was Portia's turn. As a result of working with journalists at Stuff to expose CCP influence in NZ, Portia was shocked to find herself subject to a District Court interim order after she criticised an aspiring East Auckland political candidate for his strident pro-CCP views. Prevented by law from speaking out about the issue and unsure how to challenge the judge's interim order, Portia reached out to the Free Speech Union for help. We connected Portia with Callum Fredric (a fantastic Auckland-based barrister who really cares about this cause). We shared Portia's story with you – our supporters – as well as with the media. And we began a fundraising drive to support Portia's legal challenge. Many of you contributed with donations and messages of support which allowed Portia last month to challenge the court order in a bid to have it overturned. How could a NZ journalist be silenced in this way under NZ law? Portia was targeted using a poorly drafted law. The Harmful Digital Communications Act (HDCA), passed in 2015 (and originally designed to protect vulnerable young people from online harm) is now being appropriated by cynical adults to suppress legitimate political expression from their critics. To be clear, being punished under the HDCA is not the same thing as defamation. Rather, the HDCA is concerned with subjective claims of 'harm' – this means that truth is not a valid defence. The HDCA is an almost-perfect political censorship tool. It allows authoritarian sympathisers and potential agents of foreign governments to silence Kiwis who dare to speak up for democracy. It then also threatens heavy financial penalties for those organisations, such as news or social media platforms, which share the journalist's work. Yep, you're reading that right. In our rush to protect kids from horrible online influences we've somehow denied our society not only a fundamental civil liberty, but its best defensive weapon against foreign interference. Handing a club to the opponents of democracy; should we really be surprised they're bludgeoning us over the head with it? The HDCA is also a radical departure from traditional legal principle in that it allows for the emotional subjectivity of a complainant to substantiate their own claim that 'harm' has been caused. Just so we're clear, this means that to establish whether certain digital communications deserve censoring, all that is required is for a self-proclaimed victim to strenuously maintain the digital communication in question was 'grossly offensive' to them. No specialist or clinical expert is even needed to endorse this self-diagnosis. What can Kiwis do about this problem? We need more Kiwis to realise what's going on. We're now waiting for a decision in Portia's case from the judge, and as soon as we have it we'll be sure to publicize it. But her case is not the only example of this kind. We have evidence to suggest that dozens of similar abuses of the HDCA have occurred but have largely gone unreported. Not only is the FSU campaigning for legislative reform of the HDCA, but we're also calling on – and calling out – those in positions of power who aren't saying or doing anything about the foreign interference Portia is trying to combat. Because if those people in charge are too afraid, how can we expect anyone else to speak up? Many politicians have chosen to remain quiet. Either intimidated or simply hoping they can wish away the problem, many are nervous about upsetting a major trading partner. This issue is not your run-of-the-mill 'ambiguous ethics of trade' dilemma. This is political interference happening on NZ soil. Apparently, it's easier for some to forget that free speech – not a free trade agreement – is the lifeblood of a democracy. Free speech allows our nation to flourish domestically and empowers us to exercise independence from the unprincipled and often ruthless whims of authoritarian governments like that of China. We can't leave a few brave souls to fight this situation by themselves. A small principled voice, though mighty like Portia's, will not be enough to combat the growing influence of foreign and domestic voices, however, even in a small country, will make it loud and clear to those who interfere in our democracy that free speech in NZ is non-negotiable. UPDATE: The FSU won the court case. Yay.


Scoop
12 hours ago
- Scoop
Huge Victory For Free Speech: Journalist Gagged For Exposing Chinese Communist Party Interference In NZ Wins Court Case
Press Release – Free Speech Union The Free Speech Union is embarking on extensive work to thoroughly review the HDCA, analysing all decisions ever made under it, and will present this to the Minister of Justice later in the year. We cannot stand by while individuals like Portia are … Portia Mao, a Kiwi-Chinese journalist who was gagged under the Harmful Digital Communications Act (HDCA) for exposing foreign interference in New Zealand, has won her court case with the Free Speech Union's help. This is a major victory, not just for Portia, but for all Kiwis' speech rights, says Jonathan Ayling, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. 'We're thrilled that Portia Mao, represented by the Free Speech Union, has won her court case and is no longer gagged by New Zealand law after calling out the Chinese Communist Party's overreach in New Zealand. This is excellent news for all Kiwis. 'CCP stooge, Morgan Zhihong Xiao, sought interim orders under the HDCA against Portia Mao, alleging online defamation and harassment. The initial orders (granted without notice!) required Portia to remove online commentary and apologise. With the FSU's representation, Portia applied to be heard and have the orders discharged. Judge McIlraith ruled in Portia's favour. 'The Court also rightly warned against weaponising legal tools to silence criticism, especially in political debate. The HDCA, while created with good intentions, has been weaponised now in a number of cases to silence dissent. 'Portia's victory is a huge step in pushing back on this flawed law. It was also essential for ensuring criticising foreign powers remains a legal right in New Zealand. If governments, foreign or not, can twist our own law to stop us from exposing them, then we are not free. 'The Free Speech Union is embarking on extensive work to thoroughly review the HDCA, analysing all decisions ever made under it, and will present this to the Minister of Justice later in the year. We cannot stand by while individuals like Portia are unjustly silenced. 'When a brave journalist is gagged for putting their neck on the line in our country, alarm bells should ring. Portia's victory was made possible by the thousands of Kiwis who support our work, and this result is the best outcome to protect all Kiwis' rights to seek, receive, and impart information.'


Scoop
13 hours ago
- Scoop
Huge Victory For Free Speech: Journalist Gagged For Exposing Chinese Communist Party Interference In NZ Wins Court Case
Press Release – Free Speech Union The Free Speech Union is embarking on extensive work to thoroughly review the HDCA, analysing all decisions ever made under it, and will present this to the Minister of Justice later in the year. We cannot stand by while individuals like Portia are … Portia Mao, a Kiwi-Chinese journalist who was gagged under the Harmful Digital Communications Act (HDCA) for exposing foreign interference in New Zealand, has won her court case with the Free Speech Union's help. This is a major victory, not just for Portia, but for all Kiwis' speech rights, says Jonathan Ayling, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. 'We're thrilled that Portia Mao, represented by the Free Speech Union, has won her court case and is no longer gagged by New Zealand law after calling out the Chinese Communist Party's overreach in New Zealand. This is excellent news for all Kiwis. 'CCP stooge, Morgan Zhihong Xiao, sought interim orders under the HDCA against Portia Mao, alleging online defamation and harassment. The initial orders (granted without notice!) required Portia to remove online commentary and apologise. With the FSU's representation, Portia applied to be heard and have the orders discharged. Judge McIlraith ruled in Portia's favour. 'The Court also rightly warned against weaponising legal tools to silence criticism, especially in political debate. The HDCA, while created with good intentions, has been weaponised now in a number of cases to silence dissent. 'Portia's victory is a huge step in pushing back on this flawed law. It was also essential for ensuring criticising foreign powers remains a legal right in New Zealand. If governments, foreign or not, can twist our own law to stop us from exposing them, then we are not free. 'The Free Speech Union is embarking on extensive work to thoroughly review the HDCA, analysing all decisions ever made under it, and will present this to the Minister of Justice later in the year. We cannot stand by while individuals like Portia are unjustly silenced. 'When a brave journalist is gagged for putting their neck on the line in our country, alarm bells should ring. Portia's victory was made possible by the thousands of Kiwis who support our work, and this result is the best outcome to protect all Kiwis' rights to seek, receive, and impart information.'